I am ashamed to say I am late to the party, for Washington’s War has all the elements of a great game that meets many RockyMountainNavy Family Game Values; an awesome mix of mechanics and theme that teaches as much as it entertains and is playable in an evening.

Washington’s War (WW) is the GMT Games update of the Avalon Hill’s We the People (by…Mark Herman!). For many years I passed on We the People, and WW, because they are Card Driven Games (CDG) and CDG is just not my cuppa tea. I think this is because CDG’s are hard to play solo. However, my gaming tastes have changed over the past two years and the RockyMountainNavy Boys are my game group. As such, we don’t usually go for classic hex & counter wargames favoring instead more varied mechanics. So WW looks like it could be a good addition to the game collection.

Now, my first impressions are not the greatest because the RMN Boys are traveling this month and I have no built-in game group. So my impressions are based on several solo walkthrus of the rules and game mechanics.

Components

Courtesy BGG.com

The game board is functional and thematic but not to the degree that Liberty or Death or Supply Lines of the American Revolution is. Artist Charles Kibler and a supporting cast delivered a very good game board that not only has the map of the area in question but also many game-related spaces for cards or counters or the like. The result is a good balance of theme and functionality. Of the counters, I really like the oversize, tall standees for the Generals. The gives WW a very “Kriegsspiel”look and feel.

The rules are in two books; a Rulebook and Playbook. The rules are not overly complex and contained in the nice 24-page rulebook. There are lots of nice color illustrations and examples of play and a handy index, meaning the rules themselves are actually quite short and succinct. I also think as this is the Second Reprint of a 2009 game based on a title first published in 1993 the rules have been criticized and torn apart and reworked and generally exist now in a very good state.

Game Play

Now, I said above that CDGs have not been my thing, but I see beauty in the mechanics of WW and this game could exist without CDG. The choice of Event Cards or Ops Cards (with different values) makes for a ton of choices. Developer Joel Toppen (@PastorJoelT on Twitter) also makes this important observation in the Player’s Notes:

Like the American Revolution that the game models, Washington’s War, is both a political conflict as well as a military conflict. In my opinion, the biggest challenge that the players will face in this game is balancing political initiatives with military action.

So, as I write this blog post, I am asking myself, “Do I dislike CDG because its not solo-friendly, or is it that I have been too in love with just hex & counter wargames?”

I am more than just a grognard!

Washington’s War has arrived at a time of gaming change for me, and I now see that as much as I love hex & counter, that very love has blinded me to some really great games. As my wargaming has evolved into boardgaming, and especially family boardgames. I am embracing games with a much broader set of mechanics than hexes and a CRT. Game mechanics that turned me off years ago (CDG!) I now recognize are actually wonderful, playable games/models that teach me (and the RMN Boys) more than a hex & counter military simulation can deliver.

So thank you Mark Herman, and GMT Games, and all the other game publishers out there that keep advancing the hobby and delivering quality gaming for not only die-hard grognards (guilty as charged) but also family strategy boardgamers.

Courtesy nohighscores.com…but I’ve seen this many places around the interwebs

At first I imagined a basic Battle of Britain dogfight scenario with Hurricanes and Spitfires versus Me-109s. That was until Youngest RMN Boy got his hands on the Aircraft Data Cards (ADC) and found the Me-262. He absolutely wanted to fly the Schwable. He also asked about shooting down bombers. So I quickly scratch-built a scenario where a single B-17G, separated from the bomber stream but escorted by a pair of P-51D, is jumped by a pair of Me-262.

Youngest RMN Boy quickly discovered that the Me-262 handles like a truck. We had randomly rolled for starting altitude with the B-17G at 20,000 ft. In Air Force, when the Me-262 is at 20,000 ft. or higher, it has no Maneuver Speed and therefore adds the Level Speed penalty for maneuvers. This made the already ponderous Me-262 even more ponderous!

Photo of Luftwaffe Me-262 being shot down by P-51 Mustang of the 8th Air Force, as seen from the P-51’s gun camera (Courtesy warhistoryonline.com)

I spent a lot of the game helping the Boys with plotting notations. The hardest part for them to envision was the aircraft Attitude, or banking.. Interestingly, Middle RMN Boy, my Autism Spectrum son, caught onto plotting faster than his brother. This may be because he is a bit of a “rigid thinker” and the predictability of the plot “clicked” with him easier than his more free-thinking brother.

The game lasted 15 turns, played out over about 90 minutes. The result was both Me-262 shot down by the B-17G, but with helpful contributions from the Mustangs. Unfortunately, in the same turn the last Me-262 was shot down, the B-17 fell too. This was in great part because the Me-262 used it’s Air-to-Air Rockets…and blasted the Flying Fortress.

A B-24 “Liberator” of the 448th Bombardment Group, shot down by R4M missiles of a Messerschmitt Me-262 (Courtesy warhistoryonline.com)

After the game, we talked about Air Force as it compares to the other air combat game the Boys know; Wings of Glory. They both agreed that the addition of aircraft attitude and altitude was a large step-up in complexity over Wings of Glory. They also agreed that the flight model in Air Force gave a better comparison of the aircraft.

Although he had trouble during the game with plotting, Youngest RMN expressed a desire to try Air Forceagain. Next time, he wants to fly a maneuverable FW-190! I think the next game will be better; the hardest part of the learning curve for Air Force – plotting – is now behind them.

Air Forceis a very old school-style wargame that has, for the most part, aged well. This week it was my Game of the Week. It is actually a very simple game that can mechanically be reduced to “Spot-Plot-Scoot-Shoot.” The game strikes a good balance between realism and playability – with a welcome emphasis on the playability. This week I have come to appreciate how awesome this game still is even after 40 years.

Spot – Maybe the only real negative. The rules only account for lack of spotting at the start of a scenario. Outside of a night scenario, spotting is almost automatic. Add in the lack of initiative or movement advantage for tailing and it’s hard to see value of the spotting game mechanic. But does it matter? This is one area that playability was obviously emphasized over realism.

Plot – A very old school mechanic that I know many “modern” gamers cringe at. Although there may be mechanisms that could achieve similar design effects, the truth is that plotting is fast and simple; it plain works. Among the greatest criticisms of the pre-plot mechanics in Air Forceis the fact the rules do not have any initiative or tailing considerations. This can lead to situations where your opponent surprises you by going one way when you were expecting (plotted for) another. At first I was appalled by the lack of any sort of tailing rules, but after playing am not so sure this is a real negative. Given the limitations the flight model creates (see below) the ability to (generally) predict your opponents moves exist.

Scoot – I am coming to admire the simplicity of the flight model in Air Force the more I play. Fighter pilots talk about “energy management” in combat. In Air Force, your aircraft’s energy is a combination of speed and altitude. You lose speed for maneuvers or climbing and you gain speed through engine power or diving. The speed of the aircraft is also important for maneuverability. Staying at Maneuver Speed makes for the most cost-efficient maneuvers. Going faster (Level Speed) or diving (Dive Speed) means maneuvers cost more.

Altitude becomes a very precious commodity in Air Force as it can be traded for speed (energy) and more maneuvers. In several of my play-thrus this week, I found myself clawing for an altitude advantage as it allows you to dive into the target and maybe gain an extra maneuver to line-up the shot. If you are beneath the target your options are much more limited unless you have powerful engines.

Battleline ADC (Courtesy BGG.com)

The flight model defines how aircraft move, and a worthy opponent will pay attention to not only where the opponent is, but what altitude and at what Bank they are. These are key considerations for plotting and if one is paying attention it signals the limits of what the opponent can do. For example, an aircraft in a Right Bank is going to have hard time turning left! Using the FW-190A ADC above, if the aircraft starts in a Bank Right attitude at altitude 15.0 (15,000 feet), it will have to move 1 hex forward before it can Bank Left to Level attitude, then 1 hex again before it can Bank Left again to get to a Left Bank attitude for a left turn. Now it can turn left, but needs to move 3 hexes ahead before the turn happens. This maneuver needs a speed of 5, which is actually Level Speed which penalizes maneuvers, meaning each Bank needs 2 hexes and the turn 4 hexes (speed 8). The flight model actually limits the ability for an opponent to rapidly change direction in a single turn, making plotting against this aircraft more predictable – assuming one is paying attention!

Shoot – Combat is dead-simple…and resolved with a single d6. Modifiers move you across the table. Damage is simple.

Fan-made plot sheet (Courtesy BGG.com)

Look-n-Feel – As I alluded to before, the look-n-feel of Air Force is very dated. The physical components are very plain and simple. The plot sheets are ergonomically horrible (too small) and the tables poorly laid out. I own the later Avalon Hill version of Air Force with its rainbow Aircraft Data Cards. It would be interesting to see Air Force redone today with modern graphics or player interfaces.

Over the past 40 years I have changed my view of wargames. I am constantly balancing my gaming interests between my simulationist and gamer sides. Air Force has been criticized as not being a realistic model of flight, but does that really matter? To me, it is “realistic enough” that I get a taste of what air combat is using a fun, playable flight model that considers a few key factors. The real bottom line is that the game is simple FUN; easy to set up, easy to teach, easy to play, and downright enjoyable!

I played my Game of the Week, Air Force, again tonight. That’s two plays in two days. I am struck by how quickly the game moves. The Sequence of Play is simple and although one must plot movement it goes fast. Combat, when it happens, is resolved quickly. BoardGameGeek says playing time is 60 minutes so I should not be surprised. I am playing solo meaning I am doing double work. Even so, I can play a 2v2 dogfight in under 60 minutes. Although the game plays fast, I am enjoying it immensely!

As I played Air Force(Avalon Hill Battleline Edition, 1977) for my Game of the Week I noticed that – unlike many wargames – the scale of the game is hidden away. Nowhere on the box exterior does the scale appear (for that matter, there is nothing on the box bottom at all). Nor is the scale easily found in the rulebook. To figure it out, one has to search through the rules to find:

Looking over the game, I am immediately struck by how simple the graphics are. The box art is very appropriate for the air war in Europe, showing a formation of B-17 bombers dropping their bombs over a US Army Air Corps logo. The materials inside are very primitive. The rulebook and Airplane Data Cards all look like they were done on a typewriter. The mapboards (three sections, each folded and mounted) are plain light blue with numbered hexes. The counters come in three colors; Allies white on red, Germans white on black, and markers white on bright blue. By today’s standards, this product looks like a somewhat amatuer production.

The rulebook itself is 16-pages of two-column text. I have to remind myself that in 1977 these guys did not use computers for layout. They had to type the text and insert cut-out graphics to a master page. There are at least two different type fonts used indicating to me that when Avalon Hill took over distribution of the game there was at least some attempt to update the rules. My favorite rule may be II.C. COUNTER-SORTING TRAYS [sic]. Yup, there is a hyphen between “counter” and “sorting,” but it’s what follows that I love:

Two counter-sorting trays, included in previous editions, have been eliminated due to the petroleum crunch. Trays may be purchased from Avalon Hill while supply lasts.

The counters are bagged in matching small plastic ziplock bags. Similar bags are also found in my Battleline Edition of Dauntless leading me to believe these were included in both games at the time. I can’t remember for sure; maybe I bagged them all later. And speaking the counters, I now see it a a bit humorous that the aircraft silhouettes are fairly accurate, but the other counters (tanks, Flak, clouds, etc.) are a bit comical.

For my game this week, I think I am going to take the recommendation of the Basic Level Game and go with a simple 2v2 air combat. One of the recommended match-ups is Spitfire I vs. Me-109E – a classic Battle of Britain dogfight. This is also inspired in part by a recent Timeline documentary, 13 Hours that Saved Britain. Not your usual documentary as it focuses on the memories of people who were kids and youngsters on that day. Well worth your 49 minutes.

Mrs. RockyMountainNavy usually has a student on Sunday afternoons, so the RMN Boys and myself are usualy exiled out of the house or to the basement. With all the rain this weekend we decided to stay in and play another session of Circus Maximus (Avalon Hill, 1980). Unlike our first game, we played with the Advanced Rules that really are nothing more than an expansion on the Basic Game that details what happens after a chariot flips. In the Basic Game the chariot is removed; in the Advanced Game there are Wrecks and Runaway Teams and Dragged Drivers and Drivers Running to deal with.

This afternoon was a full eight-chariot race. I took three chariots, Brown, Yellow and Orange, while the Middle RMN Boy took three others (Black, Green, and Purple) and the Youngest RMN Boy took two (Red and Blue). In Chariot Generation we all ended up with at least one heavy chariot (in my case, a +2 Driver in a Heavy Chariot with a Slow Team and Low Endurance) and one fast chariot (again, in my case a +0 Driver in a Light Chariot with a Fast Team and High Endurance).

This race featured a lot more tactical play then our first game. The speedy chariots pulled out ahead and the heavies fell behind, patiently waiting for the speedy teams to lap them, if they could. Both RMN Boys recognized the danger of my “enforcer” team and took measures to interfere with him. In quick order, Brutus (as I had named him) lost one horse and had another severely injured. He fell way behind the pack as he had to stop and cut the dead horse from the reins.

Meanwhile, Blue tried to get around a corner but was a bit too fast. A super high roll on the Corner Strain Table resulted in a flipped chariot and a dragged driver. He eventually cut himself loose after taking only light wounds. He raced for the wall but could not find an exit.

The Chariot Race from Ben Hur, 1908; courtesy michenermuseum.org

As Blue was searching for a way out of the arena, the leaders of the pack came around again. Slow Brutus maneuvered himself into position and threatened Red (the Youngest RMN speedster) and forced him to brake hard and evade attacks. Meanwhile, Orange (my speedster) tried to take advantage of the situation and slip past Red. It almost worked, but once again Corner Strain resulted in Orange being spit out of his lane in a Double Sideslip…directly into the wrecked Blue chariot.

Courtesy movpins.com

Red was in a tough bind as Brutus moved first and blocked his path to a safer lane. Red was forced to keep in his lane and ended up running over the Blue driver who was still unsuccessfully searching for an exit. Running over the driver forced a Movement Factor loss of five. Orange then rolled off the wreck and damaged both wheels. This meant that going too fast would risk the wheels coming off and flipping the chariot. As it was the final stretch there really was no choice and Orange went all-out. The first Wheel Damage roll was passed but the second failed. The Orange chariot flipped and the rider was dragged. Youngest RMN was jumping for joy as he could see his second victory at hand!

After taking damage, I elected not to cut the driver loose and stay dragging. Fate smiled and Orange went first, crossing the finish line first with the driver still dragging. The driver wound roll was made and the result was the driver surviving – just barely. Brutus almost got one last run at Red but Red was able to move away and ended up just short of the finish line.

Total game time was just under two hours from set up to end of clean up. There was much good nature ribbing given during the game. In this game, more than the first, a real narrativefeeling came through during play. Youngest RMN was exasperated at the Blue driver constantly failing his exit rolls. I told him there was obviously a centurion on the other side of some gate who refused to open it for him. Apparently not a favorite of the gods, he was unceremoniously run over by Red. The final dramatic victory of Orange, literally being dragged across the finish line barely alive, was the stuff of legends.

Circus Maximus, a long-ago childhood favorite of mine, has been reborn in the 21st century RockyMountainNavy household. Hail to Michael S. Matheny and Don Greenwood for bringing this game to life. It is also interesting to note that the the first credited playtester is Alan R. Moon. Yes, Alan R. Moon the famous designer of Ticket to Ride!